I think an advertisement in maybe a few smaller technology-related papers could be more effective, since "those kind of people" are usually more interested in exploring/trying out new stuff. Also there might be better things to spend money on than advertising right now, trying to make more ways that people can actually use the bitcoin for. Maybe ads in a business-related paper ?

Like I've said in your other threads - advertisement is not what the bitcoin community needs. We get plenty of publicity from newspapers, and we can barely handle that.

You have my attention. I'm very interested. What should we do? Build businesses?

I agree w/ Garrett.

Building services that make it easier to learn about and get started using Bitcoin is what's needed imo.

You see, we have no business professionals to make this stuff. WE HAVE TO ATTRACT THEM FIRST.

The people here are, frankly, idiots when it comes to starting a business. They are good at technical stuff but are terrible when it comes to anything requiring sound delegation, marketing and financing.

I'd much rather see a 5000 BTC bounty on more usable clients, including smartphone clients and/or a "high value" app like a professional web based casino, a predictions market, or something else that US money is dying to get into but can't.

I'd much rather see a 5000 BTC bounty on more usable clients, including smartphone clients and/or a "high value" app like a professional web based casino, a predictions market, or something else that US money is dying to get into but can't.

These things are inherently profitable. We don't have to throw money at them. What we need to do is attract innovators and entrepreneurs than can make these things.

Like I've said in your other threads - advertisement is not what the bitcoin community needs. We get plenty of publicity from newspapers, and we can barely handle that.

You have my attention. I'm very interested. What should we do? Build businesses?

I agree w/ Garrett.

Building services that make it easier to learn about and get started using Bitcoin is what's needed imo.

I agree. Before bitcoin gets a lot more attention the whole way one manages one's bitcoins needs revision. First, owned bitcoins need to be easier to secure (i.e. wallet encryption). Additionally, there needs to be a warning when you install the bitcoin client that the user is solely responsible for the security of their own bitcoins, and some suggestions should be made in that prompt. People need to be able to, at the very least, securely spend their own bitcoins from their cell phone. Those are just a few things that need to be in place before we go around proselytizing bitcoin.

Atlas I think it would be baller to put an ad on the front page of WSJ. However, I also agree with the other poster that btc doesn't need publicity right now - it needs dedicated enthusiasts to build more efficient businesses and services around it. We need easy, secure wallets. We need easy, secure exchanges. We need a client that doesn't have to download half a gig of transaction history before it can work. We need intuitive online banks and smartphone payment apps. These things take time, and I know people are working on them.

SO- what would perhaps be better is to shelve your WSJ ad until sometime in the future when the anti-free-market forces have started publicly beating down upon Bitcoin. THEN, we should pool some big money, make a kick-ass "Atlas is Shrugging" type advertisement and slap that on the paper. It's something for the future, not for now.

These things are inherently profitable. We don't have to throw money at them. What we need to do is attract innovators and entrepreneurs than can make these things.

The casino and predictions market I'll give you. The clients I won't. Making short-term alternative client development profitable by offering a bounty would be incredibly more useful for the BTC project than a WSJ ad which will attract some interest, but not a ton. Hell, the project is already getting plenty of press hits. You aren't going to attract some amazing venture capitalists with an ad in the WSJ. You will however, make it ton easier for the average person to use BTC, thus opening up market opportunities for those same VCs , if you have easy to use and secure clients that aren't a nightmare for a non-technical user to understand.

I'd much rather see a 5000 BTC bounty on more usable clients, including smartphone clients and/or a "high value" app like a professional web based casino, a predictions market, or something else that US money is dying to get into but can't.

The problem is 5000 BTC bounty is a drop in the bucket for most of those things.

Do you think it would be possible for us as a community to scrounge up 5000 Bitcoins for a frontpage ad on the Wall Street Journal?

Possible? Yes. Worthwhile? Not yet.

An effective ad does two things. First, it gets the viewer's attention. Second, it calls the viewer to action. It says, "Here's something super cool. Now go out and buy it!" The call to action has to be something ultra simple. It's usually either to call a phone number or go to a web site. Once the user takes the action, that's where marketing transitions into sales. If we're talking about a sales phone line, a salesman needs to answer that call and secure the sale. If it's a web site, the site itself needs to do the selling to get that user to take the next step (e.g. download a program, sign-up for a service, buy a product).

Marketing is like chum. You're throwing bait in the water to attract fish. Sales is what you need to do once the fish are circling to set the hook and reel them onto the boat.

Right now, we have nothing on the sales side. The average consumer will never, ever be able to figure out the Bitcoin client. A super simple web-based wallet service designed for non-technical users needs to come before expensive advertising.

The Get Firefox campaign may provide some good examples for us to imitate. Remember Firefox started out as Mozilla and it wasn't nearly as user-friendly ("dumbed down") as Firefox's current incarnations. Once they had their sales strategy in place, that's when they did their full page ad in the New York Times (http://www.mozilla.org/images/nyt_ad_2004.png).

Like I've said in your other threads - advertisement is not what the bitcoin community needs. We get plenty of publicity from newspapers, and we can barely handle that.

You have my attention. I'm very interested. What should we do? Build businesses?

Attracting the common folk isn't what's needed. And yes, that is who reads the WSJ. Direct contact/networking to people who would be interested in bitcoin businesses is what is needed. If we get even more people trying to come in and buy coins with credit cards and paypal then we'll just have a lot of people who have bad experiences due to the rough client and such.

So, if we're going to market, market to high tech VCs and entrepreneurs. That is bitcoin's best bet IMO.

Why not have a 5,000 BTC Bounty be infused into the services and products that are currently being created - maybe, a crowdsourced VC type system where the community dictates who gets what to help start/better their service ? Not sure how it would work but if we are saying the public doesn't need to know about BTC till their are services and products .... just thoughts?

I agree with the sentiment of the majority of this threads responses. Let me explain why.

Here are some thoughts on bitcoins biggest challenges. First, lets take George. His current goal in life is to acquire a new widget series 2 (tm). The series 2 widget is MUCH faster than his old series 1 widget, and he has to have one NOW!George goes to an online widget shop. Let's now look at 2 of his options:1. pay with BTC2. pay with paypal

Now, we all agree, that paying for a widget is a new, secondary problem to acquiring the widget. So he first has to 'solve' this problem before he can solve his greater problem, acquiring the widget. OK, lets look at the new secondary problems from the pov of bitcoin vs paypal.1. installing the client - paypal has the edge here, unless you get George to sign up for a bitcoin wallet service. Even then, paypal wins out over any currently competing BTC wallet service.2. acquiring the payment currency. Here paypal destroys bitcoin. I can link my credit card and back account to paypal, and they just draw the funds out as I need. They also handle currency conversion. Acquiring BTC is far more effortful, and can add days to the process. 3. Security - the bitcoin client is not safe for the average windows user. full stop. Don’t argue about advanced users, or advanced operating systems. George is neither one of those, nor has one of those. Paypal wins here, unless we compare it to a mythical btc wallet provider that provides the same amount of security.4. Usability - clearly bitcoin addresses are less friendly than email accounts. And so on.5. Merchants - need to be able to easily accept bitcoins and transfer them into the currency of choice. paypal wins again.

For every single one these immediately pressing problems(in that they are standing in between George and his widget) paypal beats bitcoin.

Now, where does BTC stand in all this. Should it give up? No.BTC has better fundamentals. Its foundation is stronger. But, when it come to the 'minor' problems, it is lacking. None of these minor problems are insurmountable.So my conclusion is that BTC needs more infrastructure, to make purchasing of widgets as much about the widget, and as little about the process of acquiring/securing/using bitcoins as possible.

Once the infrastructure is there, spend like crazy advertising bitcoin.

Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex and more violent. It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.

yes, must make it easier for the average joe to obtain his bitcoins. maybe create an ebay-like auction site that charges zero listing fees and only accepts bitcoin transactions. so if someone has something to sell they can get their bitcoins just by listing an item.